See other (s)Elections Articles
Title: Obama as You've Never Known Him! (WINGNUTS: OBAMA A COMMIE)
Source:
Washington Post
URL Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy ... 008/05/22/AR2008052203905.html
Published: May 23, 2008
Author: Dana Milbank
Post Date: 2008-05-23 13:11:42 by aristeides
Keywords: None
Views: 347
Comments: 21
Obama as You've Never Known Him! By Dana Milbank Friday, May 23, 2008; Page A03 Here are some things we can look forward to learning about Barack Obama: · That he was mentored in high school by a member of the Soviet-controlled Communist Party. · That he launched his Illinois state Senate campaign in the home of a terrorist and a killer. · That while serving as a state senator, he was a member of a socialist front group. · That his affiliations are so dodgy that he would have trouble getting a government security clearance. · That there is reason to doubt his "loyalty to the United States." These and many other implausible accusations were offered by a group of conservatives yesterday -- including a living relic from the House Committee on Un-American Activities -- in a Capitol Hill basement. The charges ranged from the absurd to the merely questionable, but anybody who watched the Swift Boat campaign of 2004 make John Kerry look like a war criminal knows that's not the point. The Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy took a blow with Hillary Clinton's collapse. But it is regrouping, and finding plenty of sinister things to say about Obama -- even if he didn't trade cattle futures. The group, assembled by something called America's Survival Inc., gathered in the basement of Ebenezer Coffee House at Second and F streets NE. They shared the stage with a big drum set, and posters documenting items they would seek to tie to Obama: an SDS newsletter from 1969 (when he was 7), and a police killing from 1970 (when he was 8). "We believe that any public figure with links to foreign and hostile interests should be asked to explain those associations," the organizer, Cliff Kincaid, told about two dozen conservatives and a few reporters. "In the case of Obama, a relatively new figure on the national scene, we submit the facts suggest that he would have serious difficulty getting a security clearance in the United States government. An FBI background check was once used to examine one's character, loyalty to the United States, and associations." "He's a member of an organization [that is] openly a front for two socialist groups," reported another participant, Trevor Loudon. "Obama was raised and educated in a very Marxist-rich environment, which often would limit his worldview," reported a third, Max Friedman. But the star of the show was the ancient Herbert Romerstein, who once plied his trade for the Un-American Activities committee. "We decided to start going back and seeing what things influenced him even before he was born," Romerstein announced without a trace of irony, before tying Obama to the Communist Party of the 1930s in Hawaii and Soviet spies on the island. "This is the atmosphere that young Barack Obama grew up in." The smoking gun? Obama's "mentor" during his teens, according to Kincaid, was "a key member of a Soviet-controlled network that was sponsored by Moscow and active in Hawaii." These accusations fall somewhere between guilt by association and guilt by invention, but the accusers were just getting started. In college, Obama "admits selecting Marxist professors among his friends and attending socialist conferences," Kincaid went on. In Chicago, he said, "Obama launched his political career back in 1995 at the home of communist-terrorist Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn," the two Weather Underground figures who have already made a cameo in the campaign. Kincaid then made the unilateral decision to accuse Dohrn of the 1970 killing of a policeman, a charge no prosecutor has made. "The Weather Underground terrorists," Romerstein added, "were instrumental in getting him to office in the first place." Those charges were relatively benign compared with the questions. One inquired about the link between "the American left and Islamofascists." Another asked about nefarious influences on Michelle Obama. A third raised the possibility that Obama's "change" slogan is based on the 1961 communist "Movement for Change." "It's clear that the communists and the socialists are backing him," Kincaid confirmed. The questions continued: "The Obama-Muslim connection . . . the background of Michelle Obama . . . How he gave $23,000 to this church . . . Was it connected with Tony Rezko . . . the results from Gary, Indiana, which were so late in being released." It was beginning to sound like a UFO convention. But the panelists took it seriously, firing questions back at the audience. "Was Barack Obama working for Bill Ayers?" Kincaid wondered aloud. Romerstein demanded: "How come for 20 years he sat in the pews and listened to a raving anti-American racist? How did he bring his two young children to this church to hear Wright rave on?" The evidence was compelling enough for participant Friedman. For him, the Rosetta Stone was Obama's chief strategist, David Axelrod, who Friedman alleged was the protege of a man with "a Communist Party-front record" in Chicago. "The more I look at this, I'm seeing there are a lot of red-diaper babies around here," he deduced. "By putting these pieces of the puzzle together, I'm beginning to see something much bigger."
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: All (#0)
Sound familiar?
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Just wait until the Democrat Attack Machine gets revved up on McCain. Will the press be complaining bitterly about that as well? There are no innocent parties in this war of words. All candidates will be blasted - and from all sides.
McCain/Obama '08 -- Because the next step is Socialism rather than Freedom.
It might very well be that some of the absurdist charges being thrown at him are causing a backlash and a teflon effect where none of them have any sticking power. So, now, he's a Communist Muslim convert to Black Lib Theology leavened with 60's domestic terrorists. So far no hint of Satanic LaVey'ish Dark Orgies. I still think he's woefully unprepared for the Republican Attack Machine, but they might be doing themselves more harm than good by frothy attacks.
It does, but this time the fear and hate mongering won't win the day. It is precisely this sort of crap the American People are tired of after watching the Bush administration govern primarily with fear, hatred and divisiveness. These tactics are a knife brought to the gunfight that is the presidential race. They are not going to block Obama's path to the presidency.
Well if it works for picking cotton... These accusations fall somewhere between guilt by association and guilt by invention, but the accusers were just getting started. To his credit, Justin Raimondo won't attend dinner with Mugabe. "The more I look at this, I'm seeing there are a lot of red-diaper babies around here," he deduced. Naah. They mostly left 4um.
If you will go along with me we'll travel with the tide that made me laugh.
These tactics are a knife brought to the gunfight that is the presidential race. They are not going to block Obama's path to the presidency. I was in my barber shop again this morning, and of course my barber and other seniors would rather vote for Hillary than Obama, and if Barry gets the nomination they'll vote for McCain instead of that "ewe gno what"! If these old guys get the word (from the AARP perhaps) that McCain will cut into social security to fund his 100 years war (at a tril per yr) war in Iraq, then they'll suddenly swallow their hatred of the man and vote against any cut in their beloved treasury cheques. At the risk of damaging my sex symbol status here on 4 I have to say this again; the most crucial issue and the special interest demographic that will decide this race are seldom part of the discussions. I wonder why folks don't see this?
I wonder why folks don't see this? LOL! You know, it does seem that the polls have erased their existence. We're so caught up in the media focus on gender/race.. traditional issue polling seems to have been overlooked. Any discussion SS and entitlements might lead to talking about the economy, the deficit, the dollar, and AARPageddon. Above all, keep the focus off the iceberg.
The last prez election my in-laws who are lifelong labor union Democrats both voted for Bush. When asked why they replied, "Why change horses in the middle of the stream?" What they didn't say is, "Bush promised not to tamper with social security, and he apparently believes that it's possible to conduct trillion dollar-per-year wars while giving tax breaks to his rich buddies and he couldn't cut entitlements after that!" And, that made him "safer" than any unknown and possibly more honest candidate who actually understands "all them numbers". Many old people would vote for 4 more years of SS safety with no regard for the long term consequences, and in fact my father-in-law just passed away in January, so, 4 years of untouched SS was long enough for him. Also, he was a vet and an "Arab/Muslim hater" and a prez who can "exterminate them ragheads" with no apparent financial penalties to retirees is the right man for the job! When my in-laws were working they'd have voted pro union, but as retirees it was "Screw that, let's get what we can from the gummint and the Hell with our own kids, grandkids and America! Had Bush said "Folks, we have to cut entitlements to buy armored Humvees and Kevlar to protect the lives and limbs of our children and grandchildren!" my in-laws would have gone diving long enough to unstrap those saddles in the middle of a raging Colorado river flood, and you can bet your ass (if you'll pardon the expression, Ma'am) they'd have changed horses!" Needless to say they would never admit or openly discuss their selfish greed, but it was always the only issue for them as it is and will be for most voters in November. I don't know who will be the next prez, but I do know that of those who are on the ballot the one who promises the most to seniors will probably win in a crushing landslide. And, if McCain sticks with his "100 years war at a tril per year is a bargain at twice the price as long as we're killing Ayrabs!" story, he may not be such a sure thing after all. Much will depend on what the AARP mails to its members. The media will spend hours with post-election analysts who explain that the voters "have more confidence in so and so's foreign policy experience, blah blah" but that will be complete and total bullshit. America's number one occupation is now elder care. Think about it.
Dawg, I can appreciate this. I have family that comes at this SS 'problem' from 84,000 different political schools of thought. But after waving through the smoke, the common denominator is....I worked for it, it's mine, they promised it to me, and I want it. Why should they pay the price for being robbed in the first place. Adding to that is inflation higher than COLA'S, medical insurance, and drug prices.. that have had them juggling pennies from pocket to pocket. For some, SS is all they have. For me, it's hands off SS and let it blow up. We could stop with foreign aid and take care of our SS right now, and then some. We could stop giving illegals benefits. Defund the war, eliminate the DHS...etc., and put a moratorium on any new programs, until we root out the fraud and rot. Elminate perks for members of Congress. No pensions, no healthcare, no free mail, no interns and pages, no limo's, no planes, and no free lunch. :)
Adding to that is inflation higher than COLA'S, medical insurance, and drug prices.. that have had them juggling pennies from pocket to pocket. For some, SS is all they have. For me, it's hands off SS and let it blow up. We could stop with foreign aid and take care of our SS right now, and then some. We could stop giving illegals benefits. Defund the war, eliminate the DHS...etc., and put a moratorium on any new programs, until we root out the fraud and rot. Elminate perks for members of Congress. No pensions, no healthcare, no free mail, no interns and pages, no limo's, no planes, and no free lunch. Right. The only thing is, if they know that SS is based on unsound actuaries then how can they justify robbing their own children? What if they're eating the seed corn that their own kids will need to survive? And, they bought homes for 5 or 10 grand at 4% interest and their own kids may never own homes. Their kids need incomes 50 times higher to buy comparable homes, and senior socialists cry "Tax those dam rich peepul!" How can they justify more entitlements? The answer is, they have been morally corrupted and even if they could find no self serving rationale, they'd simply demand that the money be collected at gunpoint and given to them. And that is the truth about socialist redistribution of wealth. And, the average recipient gets all of her/his money back in the first two years of retirement. And, they cannot justify theft from others so politicians can keep irresponsible promises to them. If they had no obligation to secure their own children's future, then what obligation could strangers possibly have to them? The time to object to politicians' spending would have been when their own perks weren't at risk and they had moral justification for it. To do so now is to object with no moral basis for their outrage. In fact they knew then that they couldn't object to politicians' selfish spending without putting their own gravy train at risk. So, that argument is too little too late. "I worked for it, it's mine, they promised it to me, and I want it." The law (Title 26 USC) doesn't say word one about benefits. Social is a tax, not a pension. "Politicians promised that you'd support me even if your kids never have health care or go to college." Those who bought the false promises of irresponsible politicians should not expect others to suffer to insulate them from their own mistake. And if they love their own kids and their country they'd be willing to sacrifice. The fact that they're not is the best argument to seize seniors' homes and property when they die, since they don't object to the govt seizing mine to pay for their cruises and Winnebago vacations to Alaska. All of these arguments collapse when seniors ask for more that was not promised to them. In addition to universal senior discounts (even though many have more discretionary play money than young working families) they now want to be relieved of school property taxes because their kids are grown. Who promised them that? Don' they realize that inflation and spiraling taxes are caused by the massive unfunded social security liability and that's why a .50 haircut is now $15? There is enough money to continue paying truly needy seniors but millionaires like Ronald Reagan (who insisted on receiving his check, too) won't hear of any talk of a means test for eligibility. They don't argue with me for long.
What if they're eating the seed corn that their own kids will need to survive? And, they bought homes for 5 or 10 grand at 4% interest and their own kids may never own homes. Their kids need incomes 50 times higher to buy comparable homes, and senior socialists cry "Tax those dam rich peepul!" How can they justify more entitlements? The answer is, they have been morally corrupted and even if they could find no self serving rationale, they'd simply demand that the money be collected at gunpoint and given to them. And that is the truth about socialist redistribution of wealth. And, the average recipient gets all of her/his money back in the first two years of retirement. And, they cannot justify theft from others so politicians can keep irresponsible promises to them. If they had no obligation to secure their own children's future, then what obligation could strangers possibly have to them? The time to object to politicians' spending would have been when their own perks weren't at risk and they had moral justification for it. To do so now is to object with no moral basis for their outrage. In fact they knew then that they couldn't object to politicians' selfish spending without putting their own gravy train at risk. So, that argument is too little too late. "I worked for it, it's mine, they promised it to me, and I want it." The law (Title 26 USC) doesn't say word one about benefits. Social is a tax, not a pension. "Politicians promised that you'd support me even if your kids never have health care or go to college." Those who bought the false promises of irresponsible politicians should not expect others to suffer to insulate them from their own mistake. And if they love their own kids and their country they'd be willing to sacrifice. The fact that they're not is the best argument to seize seniors' homes and property when they die, since they don't object to the govt seizing mine to pay for their cruises and Winnebago vacations to Alaska. All of these arguments collapse when seniors ask for more that was not promised to them. In addition to universal senior discounts (even though many have more discretionary play money than young working families) they now want to be relieved of school property taxes because their kids are grown. Who promised them that? Don' they realize that inflation and spiraling taxes are caused by the massive unfunded social security liability and that's why a .50 haircut is now $15? There is enough money to continue paying truly needy seniors but millionaires like Ronald Reagan (who insisted on receiving his check, too) won't hear of any talk of a means test for eligibility. They don't argue with me for long. There really anything here I disagree with, I just have slightly different perspective. Those who bought the false promises of irresponsible politicians should not expect others to suffer to insulate them from their own mistake All of these arguments collapse when seniors ask for more that was not promised to them. First, I just have to say that I don't believe the majority of recipients want anyone else to suffer, but I do know some that do, and actually think it's funny that they will (most likely) be long gone when the SHTF. Also, I'm not sure that seniors ARE asking for more than they believed they were promised. I understand that for some, they will be drawing SS longer than they paid in. On the other end, there are those that never draw a dime. I would think, there would be some balancing out here... just a guess on my part. The irresponsibility of the politicians combined with the mis or malinformed demographic, compliment each other. Both are complicit in kicking the can, and have gotten away with it for so long, it's been institutionalized. Then we can whip on the spoiled 'me' generation of wanting everything that mom and dad had, earlier in life... more more more... spoiled brats, raising spoiled brats... losing the lessons of hard work, saving, credit and debt, some basic moral values that COULD HAVE been passed down, but wasn't.. but for some of us lucky ones who got string and a clothespin for Christmas and were told to shutup and like it.. ;) It's a stew that no one has taken responsibility to explain properly, and come up with true workable plans that would safeguard the cash, provide a safety net for those who didn't plan ahead... because they couldn't or didn't know they would have to. All that said, I'm not justifying this mess in the kitchen. It's as if another Depression will be the only way to return some common sense to how families live, and provide for themselves. As for property taxes, you know, I am an out-to-luncher on that. I don't believe in them in the first place. As as for public school funding on property owners backs, I call B.S. Get rid of public education period, and let's get that rotten apple fixed while we're at it.. :) When old folks are told that they can work off their property tax for the state, we're heading in the wrong direction. That's just a foot in the door to ultimate seizure. And that burns me too.
Two Points: 1)Obama gave his presidency away when he chose James Johnson, a Bilderberger, to pick his VP (and maybe his cabinet) for him. 2) Obama and McCain both support Amnesty for Illegal Aliens. We currently are paying $136 a barrel for 4.4 billion barrels of imported oil every year. We have declining domextic oil production, forbidden more drilling in Alaska and off the coast of California and Florida and want to add 50,000,000 more immigrants plus their offspring and their additional demands for oil. So my question to you is this: Suppose we import 5 billion barrels of oil at $200 a barrel. Will it be one or two years of the world allowing us to give them a trillion dollars a year in worthless paper dollars before the dollar crashes and Social Security payments won't be enough to even pay your utilities? Somewhere there has to be a candidate who has an actual plan that works. Oh, I forgot. There was one who wanted pull out of Iraq completely, abolish the Federal Reserve and opposed Amnesty for Illegal Aliens. I will vote for him even if I have to write him in this November.
The Truth of 911 Shall Set You Free From The Lie
I've done this many times and yours is quite likely the best point by point reply ever. You're pretty smart for a girl, ;)
Peps is a gem.
I agree on all points. Unless Dr. Paul is on the ballot in my state then my last vote in 2004 will be the last time, period. I also ignored my last jury duty summons. In the past I either requested a delay or showed up and asked to be let off, but this time I just said screw it and didn't even reply. I'm just waiting for the fraud($) to collapse and then those of us who survive will hopefully do it right the next time. I want to be the boss of the chain gang of former tax lawyers, you know, the teams that go looking for cottonmouth moccasins in the Great Dismal Swamp! Yeah, I'll get me a pair of mirror sunglasses (like the chief guard in COOL HAND LUKE) and I'll rehab "mah Virginia accent", and I'll make em all call me Cap'n.
True that!
uhhhh....what and who is this?
Obamas x boyfriend?
well, that's silly.
#2. To: aristeides (#1)
Sound familiar?
#3. To: aristeides (#1)
#4. To: aristeides (#1)
"Only those who dare to fail greatly can ever achieve greatly." Robert F. Kennedy
#5. To: aristeides (#0)
"We decided to start going back and seeing what things influenced him even before he was born," Romerstein announced
And I will always keep you on the sheltered side
#6. To: Tauzero (#5)
Naah. They mostly left 4um.
#7. To: Ferret Mike, aristeides, Peppa, rowdee, christine (#4)
It does, but this time the fear and hate mongering won't win the day. It is precisely this sort of crap the American People are tired of after watching the Bush administration govern primarily with fear, hatred and divisiveness.
#8. To: HOUNDDAWG (#7)
At the risk of damaging my sex symbol status here on 4 I have to say this again; the most crucial issue and the special interest demographic that will decide this race are seldom part of the discussions.
#9. To: Peppa (#8)
You know, it does seem that the polls have erased their existence. We're so caught up in the media focus on gender/race.. traditional issue polling seems to have been overlooked. Any discussion SS and entitlements might lead to talking about the economy, the deficit, the dollar, and AARPageddon. Above all, keep the focus off the iceberg.
#10. To: HOUNDDAWG (#9)
When my in-laws were working they'd have voted pro union, but as retirees it was "Screw that, let's get what we can from the gummint and the Hell with our own kids, grandkids and America!
#11. To: Peppa (#10)
(Edited)
Dawg, I can appreciate this. I have family that comes at this SS 'problem' from 84,000 different political schools of thought. But after waving through the smoke, the common denominator is....I worked for it, it's mine, they promised it to me, and I want it. Why should they pay the price for being robbed in the first place.
#12. To: HOUNDDAWG (#11)
(Edited)
The only thing is, if they know that SS is based on unsound actuaries then how can they justify robbing their own children?
#13. To: HOUNDDAWG, Ferret Mike, aristeides, Peppa, rowdee, christine (#7)
#14. To: Peppa (#12)
#15. To: HOUNDDAWG, christine (#14)
#16. To: Horse, Peppa (#13)
(Edited)
#17. To: buckeye, Peppa (#15)
Peps is a gem.
#18. To: aristeides, Jethro Tull, FOH, christine (#1)
#19. To: Old Friend (#18)
#20. To: christine (#19)
#21. To: Old Friend (#20)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest